Talk:British Helsinki Human Rights Group

Someone wrote: it has campaigned against immigration to the United Kingdom.it has campaigned against immigration to the United Kingdom.

This is credible (from all i've read so far), but it would be good to have some online evidence. Could whoever wrote this please add some external links? thanks. Boud 13:03, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I couldn't source it, so I removed that particular claim. I think it came from a claim that someone else made about BHHRG, rather than a statement by BHHRG itself. -- ChrisO 15:33, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Right now the article reads like a website review. I'm sure it's nice to know that this or that information is missing from the website, but it seems improper to attach so much weight to these omissions when they might just as well be the result of an absent-minded website editor. 84.239.128.9 11:54, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The point is not simply that the information is missing but that it's part of a pattern - the BHHRG does seem to be a very secretive bunch. -- ChrisO 12:35, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Why not simply read their webpage? No secrets there.

The Exile has referenced this article in their latest (Dec 24, 2004) issue. The article is titled Russia’s Fifth Column; one in a series about the disputed election in Ukraine. There is further criticism of the activities of the BHHRG, but since it quotes the Wiki as a primary source, I've only linked to it here, to avoid self-referentiality. —Clarknova 18:32, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Exile is run by a certain Edward Limonov, chairman of the National Bolshevik Party in Russia. Not the sort of politician which would be accepted in democratic societies, surely. The BHHRG is often attacked by Stalinists, anti-Semites, and Neo-Nazis. Tells you all you need to know.

Who is "ChrisO". Who are you?

And who are you, anonymous editor? Why not get yourself a user account?

The reason I've been removing some of your contributions is because they don't fully comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view (NPOV) policy. We have to present a dispassionate view of both sides of the argument, not lend our support to one side or the other. Hence "Proponents of the BHHRG suggest that this demonstrates that the group is entirely independent of governments" is neutral while "Of course, it can easily be argued that this demonstrates that the group is entirely independent of governments." isn't - that's a commentary, not a description of someone's position. I'm sure you'd find it useful to have a look at the NPOV policy before you make more edits to the BHHRG article. -- ChrisO 21:23, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And I think you find it useful to reread your own entries. You claim things that are very tendentious, but somehow they are "neutral". You say I am a "proponent". Will you describe yourself as an "opponent"? If not, why not? Does it mean I can edit all you say by adding "Opponents of the BHHRG" say.....

Yes? Or no?

You were the one starting this entry. You identify yourself first. If you do, I will follow. Word of honour.

I am getting even more angry. On the pretext of "neutrality" you can post stuff about where the groups is based (in fact in a house owned by someone who has nothing whatever to do with the Helsinki Group), you can insinuate all kinds of things which could land you in a British court (I assume you are British), and basically repeating what enemies of this Group say, meanwhile claiming you are "neitral". Sodd that. You are not neutral. You are tendentious in the original entry you made. Change your mind to real neutrality and we'll talk.

The fact that it's based out of Norman Stone's house surely is relevant, given that it's run by his wife - Stone may not be a trustee of the BHHRG but he's certainly part of the Oxford Conservative group, as I know from personal experience, having had some dealings with him when I was at the University in the 1990s. He's also definitely associated with the BHHRG, having done work on its behalf in Slovakia [1].

So guilty by association is your modus operandi? Stone is not a part of BHHRG whatsoever. There is no "Oxford Conservative Group". Your personal experience is interesting. Are you some sort of traitor? Having experienced their hospitality only to turn around stabbing them in the back, without identifying yourself? Is that it? If so, you are a coward.

As for changes to the article, please feel free to suggest some, but bear in mind the NPOV requirements and the relevance of your contributions. Saying whether the BHHRG is right or wrong about things is both partisan and beyond the scope of the article. We can legitimately report what other groups and people say about it, and what it says about them. And please don't post personal comments to the article - that constitutes vandalism and could result in you being blocked from editing. -- ChrisO 22:24, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Blocked from editing for posting personal comments. Joker. You posted personal comments. You are the one claiming to know form "personal experience" the people you attack. You are the one who is biased and on a revenge trail. No one can block anyone from editing. Do notice I actually leave the factual truth you post in tact. I only edit where you are tendentious. I will also add stuff that you leave out which shows a truer picture of what the BHHRG does.

--- Whoever wrote this article about the BHHRG clearly has a political agenda. It is not objective information; it is an attack piece and as such explicitly violates the Wikipedia's stated terms of service policy. I am notifying those responsible for Wiki of this violation. ---